By Nasir Mahmood
KARACHI: Dr Asim Hussain’s lawyer Anwar Mansoor Khan has said that just to avoid the bail of his client, the ATC ignored certain hard facts, which we will raise in appeal against this order. He was talking to the media after Anti-Terrorism Court II rejected the bail application of former petroleum minister Dr Asim Hussain. While referring to the order passed by the court, Khan said there were many accused present in the court with whom the doctor is alleged to cooperate for treatment but none of them were mentioned in this order that is amazing. Anwar Mansoor reminded that usually he does not comment on the role of institutions and the courts but if their acts are against the law, he has the right to comment or criticize the orders passed by them. In this case the Rangers claimed that Dr Asim cured certain accused in his hospital and charged concessional rates. They alleged in the FIR that certain things were concealed from the police. It may be mentioned here that under the law no doctor or hospital could refuse to any patient, otherwise there is two year jail punishment. If we accept the allegations leveled in the d FIR that Dr Asim provided treatment to some accused, even then it was not an offense under the law. He fulfilled his lawful obligations by providing relief to a needy person. The lawyer said the ATC judge in her order has mentioned that it is proved that the people were provided treatment in Ziauddin Hospital but she did not explain how it was an act of offense neither she has referred the law under which such treatment was mandatory for any doctor or hospital. The bills relied upon by the court were produced by Rangers and we have already proved those bills were fake. But the court said it could not be considered at this stage. Another fact disclosed in those bills was that not a single person cured in the hospital was bullet injured. All the patients mentioned in those bills were of usual ailments like headache, fever and flu etc. None of them were having bullet injuries. As far as the concession in charges of the hospital is concerned, since it is run by a charitable trust, it usually gives concession to poor and needy patients sometimes more than fifty percent. However, the prosecution claimed just 22 or 23 such patients in its report. We had also challenged the authenticity of the JIT report submitted by the prosecution. In this report Dr Asim has been declared as son in law of his maternal grandfather, which was the funniest thing presented on the court record. Despite all these flaws the court did not bother to discuss merits of the case just in a bid to refuse bail to my client. Therefore, we are going to raise all such points in our appeal against rejection order passed by the court, Anwar Mansoor Khan concluded.